Extras

Credits

May 24, 2005

not a traitor

I don't like Bill Maher. I believe that he is a smarmy, leftist asshole who makes me want to puke when I look at him. But I wouldn't call him a traitor. He's just a loud-mouthed jerk.

I refuse to watch his television show anymore. I almost shot my TV the last time I made the mistake of seeing him smirking and tossing off glib comments that probably delighted the Barbra Streisands of the world, and I'm never going to do that again. That's MY choice.

I cherish freedom of speech. Bill Maher has the right to be a flaming asshole on his show if HBO chooses to air it. I don't want to censor him or have him locked up because I disagree with his moonbat politics. I simply don't watch his show.

If enough people did that, HBO would drop him like a hot rock. But evidently enough people think he's entertaning to keep the show on the air. That's fine with me, even though I hate his show.

Freedom of speech means sometimes allowing an asshole to speak, whether you like what he has to say or not.

I concur. I too think he is an a$$hole. But I don't watch him. Occasionally my kids watch him. They don't agree with him but thinlk some of his stuff is funny. I don't but they think for themselves. They are grown.

ABC quotes him as saying, "I think it borders on treason...In treason, one definition is to undermine the effort or national security of our country."

To border on treason is not to be treason. In fact, it means it is not treason, but is close to it.

The US borders Mexico. It is not Mexico.

I think Bachus' comments were correct, true.

What has been made of them is false, and as usual that falsity has been substituted for the truth for the purposes of scoring political points in the hope of turning those points into power - which in turn will be used by the kinds of people who turn truth into falsity to do the kinds of things people like that do.

Many in the media are apparently of the opinion that any bad news on the war damages the President--and their reflexive anti-Bush bias manifests as a negative war coverage. Unfortunately, there's a bit of self-fulfilling prophecy in war reporting (which is why propaganda is an important part of war). Most professional journalists undoubtedly understand that connection, but many are apparently willing to accept the collateral damage to the war effort, as long as their Tokyo Rose imitation does political damage to conservative foes. It seems to me there's a plausible treason case in there somewhere.

However, Bill Maher is clearly innocent. In order to be effective at propaganda, one must be taken seriously, and there's no evidence to suggest that's the case. It's like telling the fib one does not expect to be believed (e.g., "no Honey, that makes you look skinny"). There is no real intent to deceive--since there's no expectation anyone would be foolish enough to believe it--so it's not really a lie. Similarly, Maher doesn't even really qualify as a "useful idiot" . . . because he's not very useful.

Posted by: Cecil Turner on May 24, 2005 11:26 PM

Let the leftist @$$holes yuk it up. Far better to know thy enemy by the words which tumble off their lips than it is to have them secretly skulking around like a bunch of cockroaches and it be too late.

Consider their assinine rantings and kook conspiracy theories as an early warning system. No one with any degree of intelligence or fair-mindedness can take an arrogant misinformed jerk like Maher seriously. I don't know who makes me want to spew more, Maher or that other liberal liar Al Franken.

I disagree with almost everything Maher says, but I have to admit that he is pretty funny (unlike Al Franken). Maher doesn't piss me off half as much as his audience does. He should be embarrassed by the quality of the dimwits who hiss and mock on cue.

One night at a rehearsal, a bandmate of mine repeated the Bill Maher line about Mohammed Atta and the 9-11 hijackers as being "courageous" men, for giving their lives for their "cause".

I had to really work hard to control my temper, especially since my other bandmate is German and an unreformed Marxist/PostModern - America basher.

It's unbelievable the amount of nonsense that educated folks take from a humorist as serious political punditry.

When questioned, my bandmate listed the usual as his sources of "enlightened" commentary. M.Moore, B. Maher, N. Chomsky and "Frontline" on PBS.

I had a dream about terrorists last night. This was the first time in more than a year that I've had such a scary one. I pray that our defenses on the homefront hold the way they have for the foreseeable future.

Posted by: vladimir on May 25, 2005 07:53 AM

Maher's attempts to attract a more balanced audienced with more conservatives failed. It was probably because having Whoopi Goldberg, Cornel West and Alec Baldwin on a panel is not so balanced.

A person being paid by a commercial enterprise compromised by its customers whose job it is to generate profits for its stockholders?

Get real!

Maybe, just maybe, the idea of hearing such comments is for the purpose of thought, leading to a re-evaluation of your values. If you can't stand that others think different than you, have other value systems than you, then you will forever be frustrated by what may be the truth.

Posted by: Jerry in Lafayette on May 25, 2005 08:39 AM

Jerry--- what exactly is your point? I should listen to Bill Maher say "Everybody knows..." as he spouts liberal cant and I should really PONDER the wisdom in his words?

I'll wait until I catch Maher collaborating with the enemy before I call him a traitor. Just like I'll wait to see him do or say anything suggesting he gives a damn about the US before I call him a patriot.

Posted by: Murel Bailey on May 25, 2005 11:27 AM

Vladimir,

I admire your fortitude. I would ask you why you're even IN a band with such lame people, but it's a sad fact that non-moonbat musicians can be very hard to come by...

Posted by: Alex on May 25, 2005 01:17 PM

And why is that, Alex? Because leftists are the talented members of our society. Without us you'd all be listening to Toby Keith 24/7.

Posted by: michael on May 25, 2005 01:48 PM

You are exactly right.

Bill Mahrer doesn't really have an audience for his insipid show; it's more in the nature of a small cult gathered around a closeted and self-loathing homosexual who "thinks he is Oscar Wilde but really is Paul Lynde" (the latter courtesy of a great gay rock band).

Posted by: jack white on May 25, 2005 02:05 PM

Bill Mahrer, Al Frankin et al are comedians whose forte is political satire... and although you may regard their "cants" as lies and bullshit, the regrettable truth is their lies were not responsible for 1600 of our US troops deaths,300 billion dollars and counting, and over approx 100,000 civilian deaths and casualties...you want liars?...try Bush, Cheney, Rumsfield, Rice...

Posted by: PorFavor on May 25, 2005 02:50 PM

Jesus, porfavor. How tiresome.

And Roosevelt, Truman and Eisenhower were "responsible" for the loss of 290,000 soldiers, untold civilian casualties, hundreds of billions spent and, yes, they kept us all in the dark from time to time along the way. But I guess sacrifices made to liberate people from fascism is a different matter altogether when it involves rescuing rich, white Europeans. Sheesh.

Posted by: Cosmo on May 25, 2005 06:54 PM

And to take the comparison further, they went to war against nations which presented no immediate existential threat to the U.S., nor had these nations touched U.S. soil; and we started taking them on by invading a north Africa, the nations of which had done nothing to harm or threaten us.

And in the thick of it, you can bet the Marines on Tarawa didn't fight according to Marquis de Queensbury rules, with a pack of liberal arts akle-biters yipping and yapping about 'fairness' or insults to Bushido.

And talk about a war over oil . . . take a look at the Nazi's race for the Baku oil fields or how provocative the Japanese considered our embargo of their access to oil to be.

It's one thing to make arguments against this war. It's another thing entirely to make arguments that de-legitimize virtually every war we've ever fought.

Posted by: Cosmo on May 25, 2005 08:05 PM

Porfavor wrote:

"and over approx 100,000 civilian deaths and casualties"

So Porfavor, you're tellin' me that www.iraqbodycount.net is actually a propaganda tool of the Bush Administration?

Or are you counting those killed AND injured?

All the best,
JG22

Posted by: JG22 on May 25, 2005 10:12 PM

Oh, and one more thing. Isn't it a shame about the 'occupation?' Not of Iraq, but the of Europe, by tens of thousands of U.S. troops who haven't left for 60 years.

Sorry to post thrice, but I tire of seeing the same canards go unchallenged.

Posted by: Cosmo on May 26, 2005 10:18 AM

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Comments:

Remember info?

*Note: If you are commenting on an older entry, your
comment will not appear until it has been approved. Do not resubmit it.